Veterans Club complains of being illegally billed for Health Department Fees

 

Befow is the letter whcih Mr. Kelm read this evening at the Health and Human Services Committee of the Boone County Board.

After some heated discussion the committee deferred any decision concerning the matter.

To a large extent this is a continuation of an issue which arose from the Monday afternoon board meeting of the Health Department in which it was discovered that the VFW was paying fees even though it is an IRS tax exempt organization and as such not required to pay the fee.  The Board of Health indicated during their meeting that the matter will be placed on the agenda for their next scheduled meeting on Monday, February 29, 2016, (12:00 Noon) at the Health Department.

Are other non-profit groups paying fees to the Health Department for which they are exempt?  What about the American Legion?  Moose Club? IOU Club?

How could this all happen? What is going to happen now?

 

 

Below is the Boone County Code and the exemption (https://www.municode.com/library/il/boone_county/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=SUHITA_CH30FOFOES) which Mr. Kelm references: 

Sec. 30-35. - Submission and review of plans; permits.

(a)

Generally. Whenever a food service establishment or retail foodstore is constructed or extensively remodeled and whenever an existing structure is converted to use as a food service establishment, properly prepared plans and specifications for such construction, remodeling, or conversion shall be submitted to the regulatory authority for review and approval before construction, remodeling, or conversion is begun. The plans and specifications shall indicate the proposed layout, arrangement, mechanical plans, construction materials of work areas, and the type and model of proposed fixed equipment and facilities.

(b)

Permit required. Any business or organization desiring to operate as a food service establishment or retail food establishment must have a current food service permit.

(c)

Plans, inspection and approval. Before issuing a food service permit to a new establishment, plans must be submitted to and approved by the health authority. Plans submitted for review must be accompanied by the appropriate plan review fee as listed in section 38-31.

(d)

Full-year permit period. Full-year permits shall be valid from December 1 through November 30.

(e)

Renewal. Existing establishments which do not obtain their operation permit before December 1 shall, in addition to the required permit fee, be assessed a late charge as listed in section 38-31.

(f)

Partial-year permit. A food establishment may apply for one six-month permit for any consecutive monthly period during the current permit year. The fee for this permit shall be one-half of the annual fee for the applicable classification, plus the filing fee as listed in section 38-31.

(g)

Food establishment classifications. All food service establishments or retail food establishments shall be categorized according to their type of operation, size of operation, and risk category of the food prepared and/or served and shall obtain a permit for the class of operation as hereinafter defined. The listing of various types of operation is not intended to be all inclusive, but typical and not limited to those mentioned. If a food establishment is not specifically listed, it shall be classified according to the class to which it most closely resembles.

(1)

Class A: Fixed location food establishments which serve drinks only or food and drinks such as restaurants and taverns or other establishments of which the primary activity is food service.

A1: Food and drink, 0—50 seats.

A2: Food and drink, 51—100 seats.

A3: Food and drink, more than 100 seats.

A4(a): Beverage/prepackage, no prep.

A4(b): Sit down drink, no prep-reheat foods.

(2)

Class B: Banquet-type facilities which primarily serve organized gatherings such as schools, day care centers and banquet halls.

B1: Receive and serve only.

B2: On-site preparation.

(3)

Class C: Mobile food trucks, food trailers, caterers that do not have a county permit which covers the catering activity.

(4)

Class D: Any private or public food service establishments providing food for a limited time of not more than 14 consecutive days at a nonfixed location such as concession stands and other temporary food services.

(5)

Class E: Retail store which does not operate food preparation areas such as a bakery, butchery or delicatessen on site but sells only prepackaged food items.

(6)

Class F: Retail store which includes at least one on-site food preparation area such as a bakery, butchery or delicatessen.

F1: 1—2 check-out counters.

F2: 3—4 check-out counters.

F3: 5 or more check-out counters.

(7)

Class G: Vending machines.

(8)

Class H: Farmer's market. A temporary food stand which serves only category III foods, nonhazardous baked goods and grade A eggs, for no more than three days in a seven-day period and operates no more than six months per year. Such a market may consist of more than one vendor operating under one food permit and shall meet the following requirements:

a.

All participants in the market are in a single identifiable location.

b.

Participants are required to sign a contract with the organizer which specifies, at a minimum:

1.

Participants will comply with the county food code; and

2.

Participants must notify the organizer about changes in the types of food items being offered prior to offering them.

c.

The organizer will submit a participant information sheet for each participant operating under the permit. The information will include the following:

1.

Name, address and phone number of the participant.

2.

Menu of food items being offered.

(h)

Fee waiver. Bona fide not-for-profit agencies and organizations which operate food service establishments are subject to the permitting, inspection and other requirements of this Code with the exception of the payment of permit fees.

(i)

Failure to renew. When an existing establishment permit expires and a valid current permit is not obtained prior to commencing operations, the health authority shall be authorized to order the establishment closed until the proper permit has been issued.

(j)

[Temporary food establishments.] Temporary food establishments that serve only non-potentially hazardous food that is prepared, packed in individual servings, transported and stored under conditions meeting the requirements of this article, or beverages that are pre-packaged, non-potentially hazardous need not comply with the requirements of this section.

(Ord. of 3-8-1978, § 13; Ord. of 3-14-1979; Code 1981, § 8-26; Ord. No. 87-43, § 2, 11-12-1987; Ord. No. 94-32, 12-14-1994; Ord. No. 95-35, § 1, 11-8-1995; Ord. No. 99-38, 10-13-1999; Ord. No. 02-09, 2-13-2002; Ord. No. 11-33, 6-15-2011; Ord. No. 13-27, 11-20-2013)

 

New Area Rail spur in 2019?

 

UPDATE:   Thank you  Mr. Randall for your comment.  This story was submitted by one of our readers and the most recent WIFR newscast could not open —thus the most important information—the new route –was not published.  Thank you again.

ROCKFORD (WIFR) – Thousands of jobs could be coming to the Stateline, thanks to a new railroad project expected to bring business from Indiana to Wisconsin and now we’ve learned the 200 plus mile-long Great Lakes Basin Railroad is changing its course.

To the delight of Boone County Chairman Bob Walberg, the Great Lakes Basin Railroad is heading to his neck of the woods. Walberg says it’s a solution to the lack of freight the county has wanted for more than a decade.

“This rail would provide a great economic engine for the economics and freight part of it. And possibly with that extra rail line, it may even get used by passenger if that ever became a reality,” says Walberg.

The route, which previously ran to the west of Rockford, is being moved to the east side of Belvidere because of environmental challenges in Brodhead, Wisconsin. With so many state parks and water obstacles, the prices would have jumped because of added bridges.

Found Frank Patton says everything worked out for the better.

“If we went all the way through, once we got out of Winnebago County, we couldn’t get into Wisconsin. That was the killer. We ended up with a better route I think. It’s all a part of the process,” says Patton.

With the completion of the project still a few years away and the many hoops the rail group will have to jump through, Walberg is not getting too excited.

“We’ve got to regulate our enthusiasm a bit knowing that time will require something like this to take place and also there will need to be a lot of pieces to fall in line. We’ll be anxious to work with everyone on this project,” says Walberg.

Patton says the new maps will be re-drawn in the next few days before 8 to 10 public meetings will be set up along the route, including Rockford.

The founder says if everything remains on schedule, the entire project will be complete in 2019 or 2020.

ABOVE is from:  http://www.wifr.com/home/headlines/Railroad-Re-routes-to-Boone-County-367446171.html

 

ROCKFORD (WIFR) -- Skepticism is running wild on the massive 265 mile Great Lakes Basin Railroad project, however, organizer Frank Patton is chugging along with his $8B idea to bypass Chicago's congested lines.

"I'm used to it," Patton said. "I told my wife when we first started that she might look for a new optomotrist and she looked at me and said why is that? Cause you're going to be rolling your eyes so much. But the fact is that was two years ago and now we're on the STB treadmill and it's because it's a good idea."

The route will run west of Rockford and connect to a railhub near Chicago Rockford International Airport.

Patton says it would give potential businesses a link to ground, air and rail all in one place.

Winnebago County Chairman Scott Christiansen says this could make a longterm impact on the region.

"This is just another lynchpin for the next 100 years," said Christiansen. "This could be an enormous impact in the real sustainability. This will be the place to be when you're in that manufacturing and shipping mode."

The project was approved in September by the Surface Transportation Board. Now, Patton is working with crews to test the land surrounding the project and asking for community feedback along the way.

The progress has turned Christiansen into a believer.

"It sounded a little bit like Walt Disney at one time," Christiansen said. "If you can dream it, you can do it. It's well on its way. The progress report from the last time we met is unbelievable. I'm thinking the stars are lined up and this would be a tremendous thing for our area."

Patton says the environmental work should take the next two years to complete and cost somewhere between $25-50M.

He says if all goes well and the weather cooperates, the railroad should be completed by 2019.

 

Above is from:  http://www.wifr.com/home/headlines/Great-Lakes-Basin-Railroad-Making-Progress-338552962.html

The GOP playbook for keeping ‘dark money’ dark

 

Election 2016 Government Transparency Nation & World News

The GOP playbook for keeping ‘dark money’ dark

February 4, 2016 Shane Nicholson 220 Views 0 Comment

By Robert Faturechi
ProPublica

How do you stop states and cities from forcing more disclosure of so-called dark money in politics? Get the debate to focus on an “average Joe,” not a wealthy person. Find examples of “inconsequential donation amounts.” Point out that naming donors would be a threat to “innocents,” including their children, families and co-workers.

And never call it dark money. “Private giving” sounds better.

These and other suggestions appear in internal documents from conservative groups that are coaching activists to fight state legislation that would impose more transparency on the secretive nonprofit groups reshaping U.S. campaign finance.

The documents obtained by ProPublica were prepared by the State Policy Network, which helps conservative think tanks in 50 states supply legislators with research friendly to their causes, and the Conservative Action Project (CAP), a Washington policy group founded by Edwin Meese, a Reagan-era attorney general.

Dark money is the term for funds that flow into politics from nonprofit groups, which can accept donations of any size but, unlike political action committees, are not required by federal law to reveal the identities of their donors. The anonymity has been upheld by courts that cite as precedent a 1958 Supreme Court ruling that the state of Alabama could not demand that the NAACP turn over a list of its members.

Since 2008, dark money groups have spent more than $690 million in federal races, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. A single group aligned with Republican presidential hopeful Marco Rubio helped buoy his standing in Iowa before Monday’s caucuses with $1.3 million in ads.

The same story is playing out on the state level. During the 2014 election cycle, 40 nonprofits spent $25 million on TV ads about state races, according to an analysis by the Center for Public Integrity. That represented 3 percent of total ad buys, almost double the proportion that dark money paid for in 2010.

This year, 38 states are considering bills relating to disclosure, according to a database compiled by the National Conference of State Legislatures. Some have already adopted rules. In 2014, California began requiring nonprofits that engage in campaign activity to live by many of the same disclosure regulations as traditional political committees. Montana decided last year that politically active nonprofits would have to disclose donors, and report any electioneering communications within 60 days of votes being cast.

A flyer distributed to members of the State Policy Network, which helps conservative think tanks in 50 states supply legislators with research friendly to their causes.

A memo distributed by CAP in January to conservative activists highlighted new disclosure rules being considered in Minnesota, Missouri, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Washington, as well as ethics bills in South Carolina and Texas that contain disclosure provisions.

Groups that are throwing their resources behind stricter campaign finance regulation include Common Cause, which has offices in 36 states, and the Democracy Alliance, an invitation-only organization composed of wealthy liberal donors. According to CAP, though, the initiatives to require disclosure not only pose a threat to free speech but also to the very existence of the nonprofits.

“This well-coordinated, well-funded effort to require conservative nonprofits like yours to divulge the names and addresses of your donors is all part of a plan to choke off our air supply of funding,” the group said in the memo.

The memo was signed by many leading voices on the political right, including anti-tax advocate Grover Norquist; top officials at Americans for Prosperity, an advocacy group backed by the Koch brothers political network; the Family Research Council; the Council for National Policy; and Heritage Action for America. It describes conservatives as “a persecuted class” and compares labeling private donations “dark money” to calling private ballots “dark voting.”

The State Policy Network, which on its website calls pro-regulation activists “enemies of debate,” distributed its documents at a conference held last fall in Grand Rapids, Michigan. The material includes a map of cities and states considering measures to “force disclosure of charitable giving” and a set of “questions that help people see the consequences of public disclosure.” Among them: “Do you think the government should be able to take down names and addresses of Americans and who they donate to? Do you think people should be targeted for expressing their opinions?”

The organization also urges its supporters to choose the right phrases to color the debate, shunning terms such as “activist,” “anonymous” or “dark money” in favor of “private giving,” “censor” and “silencing dissent.” Under the header “Framing the Issue,” a man is pictured with tape over his mouth.

Other documents give conservative activists tips on where to look for “efforts to stifle free speech,” for example in bills that deal with corruption or ethics, or that define electoral activity. “More than a dozen states have considered or passed legislation that changes the definition of electioneering communications to include the everyday activity of non-profit groups, like issuing a non-partisan voter guide,” one briefing says.

Meredith Turney, a spokeswoman for the State Policy Network, said in an interview that along with the materials provided to members, the organization is alerting nonprofits regardless of political orientation that the proposals would interfere with privacy and free speech.

“These laws will impact groups from Planned Parenthood to The Heritage Foundation and start-up movements like Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter,” Turney said.

Arizona Democratic state senator Martin Quezada, who has been pushing dark money disclosure legislation since last year, said his goal is to let voters know which special interests might have influence over a candidate.

“My bill in no way limits anyone’s free speech. It doesn’t say they can’t spend that money. They’re free to spend that money all they want. It only requires that if you’re going to spend that money, you have to tell us who you are,” Quezada said.

The CAP memo also warns activists to snuff out a burgeoning alliance in some states between liberal groups seeking more disclosure and Tea Party-like conservatives who often oppose the Republican establishment. “The Left has turned the transparency concept on its head to dupe conservative legislators and well-meaning Tea Party groups to help advance their initiatives,” the memo said, citing a 2014 Tallahassee voter campaign finance initiative that capped contributions in city races at $250 and established an ethics office.

“Transparency is for government,” the group reminded conservative activists. “Privacy is for people.”

Dan Backer, a lawyer who signed the CAP memo, said the group’s organizing should be a warning to advocates of stricter campaign finance rules that his side will use “a variety of means” including litigation to preserve the privacy of donors. Backer helped bring the 2014 McCutcheon case in which the U.S. Supreme Court removed aggregate limits on direct contributions, which along with the 2010 Citizens United decision set the stage for a new flood of money into politics.

---

Related stories: For more of ProPublica’s coverage of politics and lobbying, check out our ongoing series, The Breakdown.

ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for their newsletter.

 

ABOVE IS FROM:  http://rockrivertimes.com/2016/02/04/the-gop-playbook-for-keeping-dark-money-dark/